In the current climate of populist narratives, citizens need a clear message about democracy. Agnieszka Pawłowska draws inspiration from the notion of plain language. Here, she proposes that citizens should be provided with plain democracy, which would empower them to recognise, understand, and use the fundamentals of democracy
In connection with other research on government accountability, I have, in my own research, employed the plain-language approach to analyse accountability in public information accessibility. It's an approach that emerged from the transformation of linguistics into a social and political movement, and it culminated, in 2023, in the development of an International Organisation for Standardisation normative framework.
The plain-language approach is based on the idea that, rather than governments trying to educate people to the point where they can understand official documents, governments should adapt the language of those documents to people’s cognitive abilities.
Plain language makes three recommendations. Firstly, readers should be able to find the information they need. Secondly, they should be able to understand it. Finally, they should be able to use it.
By applying the plain-language approach to democracy, citizens should be able to recognise, understand, and use the fundamentals of democracy
I believe we can apply these guidelines to how we communicate democracy. Citizens should be able to recognise, understand, and use the fundamentals of democracy.
The return of Jean-Paul Gagnon, Benjamin Abrams, and others to the pioneering work of Benoy Kumar Sarkar, Arne Næss, Richard McKeon, and Stein Rokkan is noteworthy. These philosophers upheld the concept of democracy as a unified whole, rather than dismantling it into disparate components for separate analysis.
This new phase in the Science of Democracy series is a clarion call to revive democratic values that have been misplaced and overlooked in the context of positivist research. This spirit may serve as the foundation for what I term plain democracy — something that Toralf Stark, Norma Osterberg-Kaufmann, and Christoph Mohamad-Klotzbach call the core of democracy. Or what Janusz Ruszkowski calls the DNA of democracy and Victor Valgarðsson the ideal of democracy.
This discussion is not about creating any new types of democracy, but getting rid of forms of democracy that aren't actually democractic
It is worth noting, however, that this discussion is not about creating any new types of democracy. On the contrary, it is a return to the basic ideas of democracy and a way to get rid of forms of ‘democracy’ that aren't actually democratic. One example of this is the oxymoronic illiberal democracy (Anastasia Deligiaouri), or electoral democracy, which lacks most of the attributes of a true democracy.
Matthew Flinders writes about the constant crisis of democracy; however, it is currently experiencing a real crisis. Unlike Flinders, I see few signs of a global renewal of democracy. Living in Central Europe, I agree with Simone Chambers and Benjamin Abrams that democracy is under threat.
Perhaps our view of the state of democracy depends on our experience, but we all experience uncertainty and diversity in the modern world. As Anne Applebaum writes in Twilight of Democracy, people dislike divisions; they become overwhelmed by the diversity of views and experiences. They seek clarification and certainty in a new political language that is not the language of a democracy that cultivates pluralism.
I assume that although people do not want to ‘learn’ democracy, they want to live in a democratic society. Therefore, they need a straightforward, plain description of it — a set of fundamental, inalienable, non-negotiable, context-independent features.
Plain democracy does not mean its simplistic form; one limited to the presumed most salient features, or to features that apply to a particular sphere. Democracy is both the rule of law and freedom of expression and the media. It is the separation of powers and pluralism; representation and accountability; an independent judiciary and human rights; free and fair elections and political tolerance. Democracy is truth, justice, inclusion, honesty, and participation. Can we really give up any of these?
The problem with defining democracy is less that the term is stretched to encompass non-democratic phenomena. Or that different kinds of ‘democracy’ are invented to create the appearance of democracy for the pleasure of authoritarian rulers. Rather, the issue is that leaders can quietly remove the elements of democracy, yet neither their society or their politics are considered undemocratic.
The problem with defining democracy is that leaders can quietly remove the elements of democracy, yet neither their society or their politics are considered undemocratic
This phenomenon manifests in the Sorites Paradox. When we remove one grain of sand from a pile, we don’t notice. We remove another ten grains, then a hundred, and so on: it remains a pile of sand. We don’t even notice when the pile ceases to be a pile, yet we still think it is.
In the foreseeable future, the world will not become simpler, nor will life become easier. This makes societies susceptible to populist politicians who offer them ‘simple truths’. Can we also reduce democracy to ‘simple truths’?
It would be unwise to make such a claim. Nevertheless, there is a need for a narrative about plain democracy — a clear presentation of the building blocks of democracy, elements whose removal or misuse imperceptibly transforms democracy into its opposite.
No.116 in a Loop thread on the Science of Democracy. Look out for the 🦋 to read more
Agnieszka is a graduate of the University of Maria Curie-Skłodowska in Lublin, where she completed her graduate studies in Political Science and History.
She was a Fulbright Fellow at the University of California, Irvine and a fellow of the Kościuszko Foundation at Arizona State University.
Her research centres on collaborative and local governance, political accountability, local democracy, comparative local government, and partnerships in the public sector.
She is currently leading a project on the accountability of local authorities in Poland.
Role sets of advisory councils in local policymaking process: The perspective of council members. Policy Studies, 45(6), 860–882.
From Advice and Consultation to Local Co-governance: the Case of Advisory Councils in Polish Cities. Lex Localis - Journal of Local Self-Government, 20(1), 55–76.
Beyond Advising: The Representative Role of Advisory Councils (The Case of Polish Cities). Polish Political Science Review, 10(1), 59-82.
Local advisory councils in deliberative decision-making. Findings from research in Polish cities. Journal of Contemporary European Studies 30(2).
Social Councils and Committees as (Not Quite) Present Actors in Local Decision-Making Process
Scholar Publishing House, 2021
